With all my tweeting of links to articles and videos about the current uproar over new TSA search methods. I’d like to highlight this one in particular.

At Pajamas Media, [Daniel Fernald examines][PJM-post] recent Senate hearings in which the head of the TSA was questioned.

In a hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee on Wednesday, November 17, TSA administrator John Pistole was pressed on changing security procedures in light of the continuing citizen revolt against TSA’s increasingly heavy-handed Kabuki theater.

He said, simply, “No.”

…That’s a quote. He didn’t mince words, he didn’t equivocate, he didn’t evade the question. He simply said, “No.”

And the politicians did nothing, because they had no power to do anything. The technician had the power, and they all knew it.

Fernald goes on to explain how bureaucrats are more and more becoming not just the expert to implement policy, but the makers of policy. Pulling an end around on the legislative process.

I do disagree with Fernald on one fine point. Elected officials do have power over these unelected ones. It’s just that there’s no will to use it on their part.

For all my complaints about too much legislation on the part of Congress, there are times when the lack of it can also be the problem, especially when it comes to putting constraints on the power of the state.

Interestingly, Fernald cites a French sociologist, Jacques Ellul, and his book from 1964, The Technological Society, as an earlier examination of the technician overtaking the manager for control.

Off topic: After reading Jacques Ellul’s Wikipedia entry, I find him an interesting character. Especially this part:

Ellul identified himself as a “Christian Anarchist.” For him, this meant that nation-states should neither be praised nor feared, but merely ignored. To him, human government is irrelevant in that the law contained in Scripture is sufficient and exclusive. That is, being a Christian means pledging absolute allegiance to Christ, which makes other laws redundant at best or counter to the Law of God.

A curious fusion of philosophies. Not strictly anarchist, but citing a higher authority as the only legitimate one. It almost seems like a contradiction.